Well, I got into law school...

I just write the way I think, Fortook. After all, writing is just thinking with fingertips. It's the way I speak. If writing well radiates intelligence, then it's a mere byproduct of the craft of skillful writing. Those who wish to radiate intelligence should learn to write well — all the time. But usually when you find a person who writes well, that person simply writes well. It doesn't mean that his or her well-crafted piece was calculated to sound impressive. And what does it expose about a person who, for instance, only notes that, gee, that writer uses big words? Law students should be far above the legions of illiterates that populate the internet. You write very well yourself, Fortook. I embrace good writers.

I was wondering: What North Eastern state accredited schools does anyone here have experience with? I have only met a few attorneys who went to a state accredited school and most were in the South East or Cali. In fact, one in particular I remember as a sleazeball lawyer, but a pretty successful one. I didn't like him personally, but he had a good rep in the area. I think there are only a hand full of states that allow state accredited schools (maybe 5 or 6). I know Mass has a few, but I don't know any details.

Just wanted to respond to this, mostly for any lurkers reading these posts who are looking at the same decisions and issues. I'm doing well. Finally able to take a few months away from work, I decided to look in to interning, for both the actual work experience and the added legal experience for my resume. I was offered (and took, obviously) the exact federal judicial internship I was hoping to get. I work with two other interns. Both are from T10 schools and --according to themselves-- are well-ranked in their classes. As they become available, I'm being personally introduced to well-known attorneys working in the field I am interested in by faculty from my school, and have little doubt that those connections will mature into opportunities when the time is right. Attorneys that work for firms that students break their neck to get in front of for OCI's.

I'm in the local Inn of Court with students from a prestigious law program. I get a kick out of the assumptions re: state-accredited programs that sometimes slip out in conversations with those students. Given the usual competitiveness of law students, some seem insistent on getting their LSAT scores worked into casual conversation. I scored in the 99th percentile. I'm not impressed. I'm far more impressed with the CPA who was well-regarded in one of the "Big Four" accountancy firms and is seeking his JD because he wants to be able to tackle what he sees as egregious ethical violations rife in the industry. I'm far more impressed with the private investigator who is seeking a legal education only because it's helping him as he transitions into what he wants to be doing: investigating human rights abuses in Central and South America and helping to hold American actors responsible where he can He spent his summer last year in Colombia working with a non-profit group interviewing labor leaders and investigating suspicious deaths of the same. (His project this summer is a demonstration and study of faulty fire investigation techniques that have demonstrably resulted in false convictions for arson and murder in the past.) I'm far more impressed by the single mother of two who works as a restaurant manager 50+ hours a week, commutes an hour to class each way and still manages to do well in our classes while being the driving force behind our SBA, no matter how exhausted she looks some days. Not sure what you'd call that other than "drive." Or the former bank VP whose resume is an embarrassment of riches, who is simply bored in his semi-retirement and thought that getting a JD would be "interesting."

I'm writing this at 2:30 because after my day with the judge, I still had to stay on schedule with cite-checking law review articles so that I'm not stuck doing too much LR stuff when classes start up again, along with work. So yeah, I'm doing well.

Did phreejazz write this and then deactivate his LSD account? Peculiar, based on his passion and desire to defend state accredited schools. The best defense is not to acknowledge the criticism I think, but to ignore it. Otherwise the thought- "me thinks he protests too much"- creeps into everyone's mind.

I can completely understand why some people choose state accredited schools, by the way.

I can completely understand why some people choose state accredited schools, by the way.

Hi, Fortook. I would merely observe that such an education has a place. And it's not a bad education, although it's doubtless much more a case of "it is what you make of it" than one should expect from ABA schools. State schools serve niche markets. They can facilitate advancement for older people who already have established careers, contacts, and professional reputations and credentials. One of the reasons I'm in law school is because I began to notice how often young attorneys in my company were calling and asking me to explain things that, to me, were right off the cover of Duh! Magazine. At the same time, many of my peers like to make smart-assed remarks about the ignorance of attorneys, which strikes me as naive, not to mention self-serving. I have met very few dumb people who passed the bar exam, wherever they went to school. At any rate, I ranked in the top 5% after 1L. For about two days, I mulled over the idea of applying to McGeorge, just to see if they'd take a 50-year-old into their night program. But after weighing the cost and the likely benefits, I decided to stay where I am. Yes, I would love a JD from an ABA school. But my tuition would've doubled or tripled if they had taken me. More importantly, no firms out there will ever hire me based on my having a JD from an ABA school who would otherwise reject me based on my having a JD from a state school. For me, becoming a lawyer means becoming licensed to practice law in the field I love, a field in which I've already acquired many years of experience. But I need to get the license.

At any rate, having read enough short-sighted, disparaging comments about state schools from so many mediocre writers — as well as plenty of damned good writers, to be fair — the recreational diversion of waging a vigorous defense of the state-school underdog appeals to me. If nothing else, it's enjoyable just to practice advocating for something.

To emphasize: I think going to a state accredited school in this legal market is probably a bad idea. It will be difficult to get a job, and the reason many people choose state accredited schools is because they are having trouble getting into an ABA school.

What makes the above person a complete idiot is that they claim to have scored in the 99th percentile on the LSAT, which unquestionably would lead to massive scholarship offers at a ton of different ABA schools, making the "oh it's cheaper argument" ridiculous.

1) It diminishes a person's position when he or she resorts to insults and name-calling.2) As I've noted previously, the majority of the people who sit around me in my state school are not wondering where they'll find work after graduation. The doom and gloom about not finding work later simply doesn't apply. Like me, most of my classmates already have solid careers, which careers were built upon the foundations of their college educations in a wide variety of fields. Call it a condition precedent if you like, but if you meet that pre-existing career condition, state schools can be a great way to go. Becoming licensed to practice law will simply open doors that would otherwise remain closed. No, I won't be getting a job in BigLaw when I graduate. But the opportunities within my industry will enlarge substantially. Some of my classmates and I anticipate becoming in-house counsel within our given industries, what with the contacts, experience and reputations that we've built. Great pay, weekends with the family, prestige among your peers, and working in a legal field. A pretty good gig. And a state school degree will do just fine to reach that goal. 3) Yes, some people do enroll in state schools because they would have trouble getting into an ABA school. How is that relevant to those who fit the profile I've described above? That's for the individuals to decide for themselves. 4) If you can get a meritorious scholarship, take it. But the argument in favor of a state-accredited education on the basis that it is less cost-prohibitive than ABA schools is not rendered "ridiculous" by the example of one person. The context is correct, but your ultimate claim is overly broad. Everyone has a unique station in life. And not every prospective student who got good grades as an undergrad wishes to risk $175,000 that he won't end up contributing his experiences to an angry law school scamblog someday. Cost matters, especially in this market.

I do feel, though, that anybody in her 20s or 30s who is considering law school should be shooting for the moon. Get into an ABA school. There's no point in settling for anything less if you have the time ahead of you to make it pay off.

Some of my classmates and I anticipate becoming in-house counsel within our given industries, what with the contacts, experience and reputations that we've built. Great pay, weekends with the family, prestige among your peers, and working in a legal field. A pretty good gig. And a state school degree will do just fine to reach that goal.

Duncan, you are missing the point. These so-called "disparaging" comments are not made out of malice, this is real advice and perspective given by people who have been on that path, or who have a different perspective on it. It is not wise to simply view it as something that must be challenged - stop and listen with an open mind. It is simply advice that may prevent someone from making a very costly mistake. The perspective is that rather than invest time and money on a likely worthless JD, one may want to consider some other training or degree.

This idea that doors will suddenly be opened to new opportunity within existing careers is not a common reality - it certainly is not if one is planning on suddenly becoming in-house counsel. Companies generally look for Sr. Associate/Partner level people for in-house, not a newbie from a non-ABA school. The legal department will not look at you differently b/c you come from some other branch of the company with specialized knowledge - this is not meant to be harsh, but in-house legal does not need or want new lawyers from within the company. You need to seriously, critically, and specifically ask yourself WHAT doors will open? WHAT do they lead to? HOW do they open? "Doors will open" is as nebulous and non-descript as "hope and change." WHAT ARE THE DETAILS? If those opportunities exist right now, today, why are they not filled then?